Interim charging orders on deeds

Thrugelmir

I would recommend using a solicitor.

Executors of an estate are duty bound by law.

Failure to administer properly results in personal liability for the individual(s) concerned.

A creditor is aware of the death. So there's no where to hide.

ValHaller

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Possible that the charging order has changed the house from joint tenants to tenants in common.

Then transfer of house is not automatic.

There was no charging order and in the circumstances given, it would not be appropriate for a charging order to be awarded, let alone prejudice the interests of an uninvolved joint tenant by changing the property from JTs to TsiC.

crystal_clear

Thank you ValHaller thats my understanding of the situation so far... I also understand that if Aunt and Uncle were in a position to sell (rather than this of 1 deceased) the restiction would have just dropped off at point of sale aslong as those holding the interim charge restrictions were duly notified of the sale.

Now because its not a sale of property its the question of how to move forward for my Uncle to get the property assigned soley in his name as would have automatically done should the restrictions not have been in the deeds. But land registry cannot do this without confirmation that there are no longer active restrictions (thats where i am stumped as to how best to go about obtaining this info to give land registry and preferrably without dragging it out via solicitors until i have the facts on what to do and can get uncle to walk in and say i need this and that doing to get this end result so he can submit details to land registry himself and get deeds altered himself as dont need a solicitor to act for him on that)

crystalclear

ValHaller

crystal_clear wrote: »

Thank you ValHaller thats my understanding of the situation so far... I also understand that if Aunt and Uncle were in a position to sell (rather than this of 1 deceased) the restiction would have just dropped off at point of sale aslong as those holding the interim charge restrictions were duly notified of the sale.

Now because its not a sale of property its the question of how to move forward for my Uncle to get the property assigned soley in his name as would have automatically done should the restrictions not have been in the deeds. But land registry cannot do this without confirmation that there are no longer active restrictions (thats where i am stumped as to how best to go about obtaining this info to give land registry and preferrably without dragging it out via solicitors until i have the facts on what to do and can get uncle to walk in and say i need this and that doing to get this end result so he can submit details to land registry himself and get deeds altered himself as dont need a solicitor to act for him on that)

crystalclear

From the OP of the referenced thread

You are therefore correct in saying that when the Land Registry receives an application to register, for example a transfer, we will not ask to see the consent of the person who has the benefit of the charging order. We will only want a certificate from the applicant for registration or his conveyancer that the person who has the benefit of the charging order has been given written notice of the transfer.

As I read that, it looks like procedural advice from the Land Registry. I would take it to mean that Aunt's executor or administrator would write to the named parties advising them of Aunt's death and the intention to consent to Uncle transferring the property into his sole name. Or perhaps Uncle should write advising of the death and his intent.to transfer to his sole name. Basically, do what you would do without the restrictions, but inform the named parties.

Although you are understandably reluctant to inform the creditors until you at least understand, I would suggest that it is inevitable that you must, so there is no point in delaying. Undoubtedly they will whine, grizzle and attempt to give you and Uncle a hard time to try and recover their money. But you just have to fend them off and certainly not agree to anything.

Thrugelmir

ValHaller wrote: »

let alone prejudice the interests of an uninvolved joint tenant by changing the property from JTs to TsiC.

If a charging order is obtained. Then by law. The change is automatic.

Better to be in dialogue after having sought advice. Than leave oneself exposed. Judges are sympathetic providing the matter is dealt with in the proper manner.

ValHaller

Thrugelmir wrote: »

If a charging order is obtained. Then by law. The change is automatic.

Better to be in dialogue after having sought advice. Than leave oneself exposed. Judges are sympathetic providing the matter is dealt with in the proper manner.

But it is not a charging order, it is a restriction.

crystal_clear

Thrugelmir wrote: »

If a charging order is obtained. Then by law. The change is automatic.

Better to be in dialogue after having sought advice. Than leave oneself exposed. Judges are sympathetic providing the matter is dealt with in the proper manner.

Thrugelmir As I understand there are 2 kinds of charging order and I am under the impression you are of the belief this is the 2nd part which is a final charging order and yes you would then be correct that its final and these two companies would have a lean on the Aunts share of the house and become tennants in common with uncle technically.

where my Aunts charges differ is that they are only restrictions to notify at point of sale interim charging orders never made final as above ...... the only obligation she would have had was to notify said companies say 14 days before completion of a sale and the said companies technically wouldnt have had time to list in court to have made them final and place the full charge outstanding against the property. The sale completes and the 2 interim charge restrictions would have vanished off the deeds. ( see comprehensive thread charging order myths)

crystalclear

Thrugelmir

crystal_clear wrote: »

where my Aunts charges differ is that they are only restrictions to notify at point of sale interim charging orders never made final as above ...... the only obligation she would have had was to notify said companies say 14 days before completion of a sale and the said companies technically wouldnt have had time to list in court to have made them final and place the full charge outstanding against the property. The sale completes and the 2 interim charge restrictions would have vanished off the deeds. ( see comprehensive thread charging order myths)

Then I refer you again to the role of an executor of an estate.

An Executor can be held personally financially liable for any loss resulting from a breach of their duty - even if the mistake is made in good faith.

This will include:

Failure to pay the debts and liabilities of the deceased
Failure to settle the affairs of the deceased relating to: Inheritance Tax, Income Tax and Capital Gains Tax
Failure to settle any claim against the Estate
Failure to identify and correctly distribute assets to the beneficiaries (including those initially not known about)

crystal_clear

Thank you
This is where I am treading very carefully and with a lot of caution trying to establish the correct procedure on the restictions-interim charging orders there is no estate other than the what would have been automatic transfer to sole ownership of the house when Aunt died she left no will no insurance and a mere 17p in her bank account.

That said national debtline have said uncle (a pensioner) has to get a letter of administration and that her estate has to go to probate ..... tomorrow i am on that case checking facts with probate helpline. Also where possible no one wants to be named executor and only at a push personal representatives.

crystalclear

Thrugelmir

crystal_clear wrote: »

Also where possible no one wants to be named executor and only at a push personal representatives.

Someone has to sign the probate form. Probate fraud is a serious offence.